United States v. Gonczy

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that the “meticulous standards of both promise and performance” that govern prosecutors in plea agreements stem from the defendant’s waiver of fundamental constitutional rights that would otherwise be present in a jury trial
• rejecting the “argument that the prosecutor[’s]” discussion of victim impact “merely anticipat[ed] the [defendant’s] request for a downward departure”
• prosecutor seemingly stood by the recommendation but stressed the harmful consequences of the defendant's acts so much that no \impartial observer [would] think that [the government] thought [the agreed-upon sentence] was . . . adequate\
• “The government’s review of the facts of the case and of Gonczy’s character cannot constitute a breach of the plea agreement as they were relevant to the court’s imposition of the sentence; no limitation can be placed, by agreement or otherwise, on this information.”
• conclud- No. 05-1673 5 ing that the government breached its plea agreement when it argued for the agreed-upon term but then noted that “the defendant at a minimum deserves what the Guidelines provide for and those are his just deserts”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).